Faction destroyers
Faction Battlecruisers

T3 Frigates
T3 destroyers
T3 battlecruisers
T3 Battleships

start at top.

A few things...

1. New ships have to have a job (see: niche, specialization) that they can do that doesn't obsolete other, older ships.
2a. There are no such things as "small carriers."
2b. Capitals are banned in high-sec for many, many reasons.
3. CCP plans to add a bunch of stuff when DUST comes out (hopefully) .
4. RP-wise, it makes more economic sense to refit (or dual design) "standard" military ships for Capsuleer use than to design something strictly for Capsuleer use (remember, in the EVE universe WE are the minority).

I don't think there's been any recent additions to Eve's fleets, so I had a few ideas.

- More destroyer designs with better power and tanking abilities, maybe some bonuses towards taking down frigate fleets.
- Carriers available in high sec again (the small ones)
- Troop transports (after Dust 514 release)
- Miscellaneous ships from frigate to battleship that aren't race specific (we shouldn't all have ships that are 'replicas' of our races
military)

2. There is, carriers and super carriers. Carriers should be fine since they are only more powerful than a BS as far as defense

*snort*
Are you trolling? What about their remote repairing bonuses? Repping up 3000 to 4500 hp every 5 seconds and able to tank around 1500 to 3000 dps doesn't seem a bit OP in high-sec to you? You know that triage only increase these stats, right?

It doesn't have overwhelming firepower like the super capitals do, yet can take punishment from multiple battleships and acts like a small mobile base.

All I'm suggesting is adding this lower tier capital to high sec so that corps in the areas have a mobile BoO and mothership without making it devastating to BSs

You really are a bit simple, aren't you?
The remote repping power carriers are capable of is a massive force multiplier, and their defence (especially when spider tanking) would make them all but invulnerable. Carriers would become the be-all end-all of highsec warfare, much like supercaps are in null.



You obviously don't know the first thing about capitals, if you think letting carriers into highsec is balanced.

Edit: in fact, I just ran up a few rough figures in EFT.
2 Chimeras: 6,000 DPS tanked
3 Chimeras: 7,700 DPS tanked
5 Chimeras: 12,924 DPS tanked
Don't even get me started on the monstrosity that is the Archon.

5 Carriers isn't even a lot, my 15man corp have around 6 by ourselves. Can you even imagine the shitstorm you'd be unleashing by letting this sort of fleet out into hisec?

See, this is where you didn't even bother thinking ahead - one carrier isn't that bad, but as soon as you start throwing more in everything goes to hell.

Edit2: Oh yeah, and this is without even bringing triage into this. 16k DPS tank and ridiculous RR ability. Try killing anything in a fleet that has a few of those

The thing about it is that its meant to be the flagship in my idea. Yes they can tank extraordinarly well, but you just as easily face enemy carriers as well

but if you take out the drones they're just tanks without guns.

If nothing else, they could always implement a one carrier per user or per corp rule in high sec.

Yeah, the problem with that is the fact they won't be used so much as a flagship as 30 flagships.


No, if you take out the drones they're horrifically tanky and powerful remote rep ships with less firepower than usual that make their escorting battleship fleet stupidly hard to kill.

Seriously, how do you just not understand that drones are a distant secondary role for carriers and the real power is in the RR?

It's simple really: allowing carriers into highsec would mean that all major battles depend on nothing but who has more carriers - just like nullsec warfare depends on nothing but who can field the most supers.


Any system like this you put in can be worked around easily.

but I do wish high sec had some sort of capital ship besides battleships.

"Hey! I have one more dreadnought than you! The rest of your fleet is pointless next to me!"

And why does it need them?



Pretty much. Allowing this to spread into highsec would be the worst thing to do right now.

Oh and regarding the rest of the OP on adding a load of new ships - how about fixing the dozens of broken piles of fail we have now before adding a bunch of new stuff?

It doesn't need them per say, I'd just like to see a ship that's used more as a command ship and only available in limited numbers.

my thread is about adding what we lack.

I hope CCPs fixes some of it's broken ships, but I don't count on it.

All I'm suggesting is adding this lower tier capital to high sec so that corps in the areas have a mobile BoO and mothership without making it devastating to BSs (like super carriers, dreadnoughts, and titans)

Oneiros buff? It sounds pretty op to me already. 4 TLs and T2 Reps man, with a guardian buddy >_>
But i guess i cant really tell, i'm a logi player, but i haven't skilled the oni (yet?)

Also, why did everyone ditch my mini-carrier talk ;(
IMO The game really, really needs something about the size of an Orca, but more combat focused.
And T3 Battleships could totally be mini-carriers :S

I mean, when i saw the Orca and people talked to me about it when i started the game, i really imagined it to have tank and fittability comparable to a BS Sized Ship (except for PG of course, else you could easily turn them into neut-boats)
When i looked at the actual stats... man, i don't even understand why anyone use them anymore.
It got BS size, it's slower than a BS, but it fits worse than a cruiser. U kiddin r8 br0 ?

Something with the power of a carrier,

or even a BS with carrier base of ops capabilities, is simply to powerful in highsec. It would win any fight where the enemy didn't field one as well, and thats why we hate supercaps.

I never talked about something like remotes, or jumping, or uber triage. I just said fighters.


Somehow, i fail to see how 4 fighters (aka 400 dps) are more than a gank phoon (aka 1200 dps)


Oh and so, whats that thing about the oni?
And seriously, i still think Orca is very unbalanced in term of defensive stats... it could use a 3x hp multiplier without being too strong, imo.

No...I'm not...and I'm very aware of the ships defenses, that is exactly why im saying it deserves high sec clearance. It doesn't have overwhelming firepower like the super capitals do, yet can take punishment from multiple battleships and acts like a small mobile base.

IMO The game really, really needs something about the size of an Orca, but more combat focused.

man, i don't even understand why anyone use them anymore.

It got BS size, it's slower than a BS, but it fits worse than a cruiser. U kiddin r8 br0 ?

Yes, because highsec totally needs to be capital ships online as well. Really, this suggestion gets repeated pretty much weekly and nobody can come up with a good reason for it beyond "because".

Dear god you're a tool. The Orca is an industrial/transport/utility ship. It doesn't have the fitting for combat because it isn't designed for it.

The Orca is BS sized, and tanks LESS than a badger mk2. I take it Badgers are combat ships?

The Rorqual is capital sized, and can mount capital modules
The Orca is expensive like 3 Tier 3 BS, and fits like a cruiser.

The Orca is BS sized, and can mount cruiser modules

The Orca is BS sized, and tanks barely more than a hulk

The Orca is BS sized, and tanks LESS than a badger mk2.

What's the best tank you can achieve on a Orca though? I searched around, probably badly, and got no fitting tool on hand at present, but i can't find an orca fit with more than 500 dps tank.
On the other hand => http://eve.battleclinic.com/loadout/35183-Badger-Mark-II-New-battlebadger-l4-edition.html

That's because you don't DPS-tank the Orca GÇö you buffer it. At no point should it be in a situation where it needs to DPS tank.

TL;DR: seriously, what's wrong with this idea of T3 Mini-carrier BS?

Anyway - this had nothing to do with the orca in the beginning - as you guys all outlined, the orca is not a combat vessel. Now, this means, since there is truely nothing between an Orca and a Carrier, that there's no real combat/exploration/whatever vessel below capital size.

Its called an Orca, and its built to be exactly what you are looking for.

...You're kidding right? What about it actually makes it a good command ship? It's lack of combat bonuses or it's fewer slots than you a cruiser?

No, you got that the wrong way around: their overwhelming defenses is what makes it impossible to let them inside highsec space GÇö they would make things far too safe. Having a lot of firepower is not a problem; not being easily suicide-ganked is.

Actually the real question is: what's right with it? Why does the game need this? Why does every area of space have to be spammed with capital ships?

It gives fleets an advantage over traditional fleets. While regular fleets consist of bulks of similar ships or ships of the same class, a capital of some sort would add substantially to that sides survival. While the capital doesn't need to be overwhelming in firepower, or even go much greater than a BS, it should be able to go toe to toe with almost any three - four battleships at once and have at least one bonus that affects every ship in the fleet.

Going to jump on the 'new ship' thread, and ignore the carrier debate by posting some ship ideas I've been tossing around in my head, which I wouldn't mind seeing:

Dedicated profession ships. ie: ships which grant bonuses to Archeology or Hacking. Limited use? Sure. But it still might be kind of fun (and a hacking ship might be useful during Incursions, or other hacking-related content). Perhaps these are frigates or cruisers of some kind. The bonuses could increase the range and/or the chance of a module successfully working.

Maybe a Sisters of Eve faction ship? Something like the Noctis: grants 5% cycle time of analyzer and codebreaker modules per level, and 100% increase in the range of analyzer/codebreaker modules per level. (Maybe like a pirate faction, it splits Gallente/Minmatar cruiser levels).

Right, so now you have bulks of those new ships and highsec becomes "mini-carriers Online"

It gives fleets an advantage over traditional fleets. While regular fleets consist of bulks of similar ships or ships of the same class, a capital of some sort would add substantially to that sides survival.

it should be able to go toe to toe with almost any three - four battleships at once and have at least one bonus that affects every ship in the fleet.

No. These ships can DEFEND against several ships

No. These ships can DEFEND against several ships, but do not have firepower to take them out. That is the purpose of them having a fleet that provides the guns.

Ships in highsec need to be fragile. Otherwise, they provide far too much safety under the umbrella of CONCORD. What you're asking for has no place in that kind of environment.

But sure, if you want that kind of survivability it must come at a cost. How about: they cannot be undocked unless you're under a wardec? Or how about: they are completely exempt from CONCORD protection GÇö attacking one does not trigger a response and does not cause a sec status hit. That's the paradox you need to address if you want it in highsec: a ship that strong needs to still be easy to kill.

GǪand that would be bad. It would significantly reduce the variety of ship compositions and would, indeed, make it into mini-carriers online since you'd pretty much have to field one to have a sporting chance.
Why is that needed? More importantly: if it can stand up to that kind of abuse, how do you gank it?
GǪwhich, again, would be bad.

Ships in highsec need to be fragile. Otherwise, they provide far too much safety under the umbrella of CONCORD. What you're asking for has no place in that kind of environment.

But sure, if you want that kind of survivability it must come at a cost. How about: they cannot be undocked unless you're under a wardec? Or how about: they are completely exempt from CONCORD protection GÇö attacking one does not trigger a response and does not cause a sec status hit. That's the paradox you need to address if you want it in highsec: a ship that strong needs to still be easy to kill.

Perhaps for best balance individual players may not construct one, but corps may however are limited to only one. Once one is in their possession it can not be given to anyone else and can only either be destroyed or will be placed in market for corps who don't have one yet should the corp disband.

Here I was thinking I get new ideas from the community, le sigh....

My Catalouge of Designed ships from smallest to biggest

Fighter-Interceptor - Fighters designed to take out other fighters and drones.
Corvette - Pod piloted Fighter Sqadron leader, provides bonuses to assigned fighters normally lost from a carrier.

Minelayer - Frigate with special control for suicide drones and expanded drone bays
Swamer - Tech 2 Minelayer deploys more mines than traditionally, suffers lack of cargo bay and limited employment on field.

Command Frigate - Frigate able to fit a single link and keep pace with desrons

Bomber - Sniping Missile Frigate
Heavy Bomber - Non-stealth bomber, with multiple launchers.

Heavy Destoyer - Less Offense more defense DDs
Gunship - T2

Escort Destoyer - lower offense DD with more utility
Starking - T2 Support ECM platform (IE Remote Sensor Boosters)

Tenders - Tier 2 Logistics for Hull and Module Repairs, able to transfer heat from others to itself, recovers drones and delivers drones and ammos into ships bays remotely.

Voyager Ships - Sisters of Eve Ships designed for exploration and revamped archeaology

Hypernet Ships - Mordus Legion ships designed for Digital Fortress Artisans and revamped hacking.

Reclaimer Ships - Thukker Tribe ships designed for advanced salvaging that recovers entire parts of scraps.

Munitions Ships - A heavy minelaying Tech 2 battlecruiser, has longer endurance than the smaller ships but still is exhaustable supply of mines rather quickly

Flagships - A special Tech 2 battleship that generates a powerful field around itself, field effects vary upon the desire of the pilot scripting, most electronic warfare effects and other non traditional ones such as Forcefields. Some effects consume fuel.

Superbattleship - New Weight Classifcation and Training Regiment, Warships marginally larger than a battleship that bear some capitol ship like capabilities and mission roles without outmassing gate limits, much sacrifices where made into the desing that they are nothing more than slightly tougher and slightly more dangerous battleships overall. IE an Orca would fall into this classification if it had weapons.

Tier 1
Escort Carrier- A small carrier that can only launch a single wing of fighters to support the fleet, has exclusive use of fighter interceptors. Great for escorting assualt forces Cynojammed system where carriers and super carriers are present.

Tier 2
Arsenel Ship - A small tough seige platform able to mount a seige mode module and a XL gun. Great for assailing capitol ships and seiging any cynojammers.

I do have alot more ships but I donnot feel like sharing them at the moment.

hmmm you're going about the entirely the wrong way.

Jarome... answer this for me...

If my enemy has a ship that can tank multiple battleships and still fight back, why would I bring anything else to the field other than that same ship (or staggering amount of people)?

If there is a corp restriction to their use... I have all my guys make their own personal corps, war dec you and/or make an alliance between us all, and then each field our own personal "mini-carrier."


Look... here's the thing. Your idea is not new. CCP tried to introduce the "flagships" concept by bringing in Titans and Supercarriers. They were meant to be so ungodly expensive and so difficult to build that only large groups of players could afford to build them... making them corporate/alliance assets... "flagships."

The reality of the situation was that players found a way to streamline the building process, amass huge amounts of ISK (both corporate/alliance and personal), and begin building/buying/selling them for "personal use."
And given their power, it'd be DUMB not to build/buy them en mass and field them against an enemy who may or may not also be building/buying them as well in the hope to gain the SAME tactical advantage.
It's the goddamn Cold War all over again. Except without the fear of wiping out all life as we know it and no economic/resource/manpower/political restrictions.


Now... you can TRY to install restrictions on the use of "mini-carriers"... however past experience tells us that no matter how obscure a loophole or a workaround is, it WILL be found. In which case you create a nightmare scenario for the programmers on trying to keep one step ahead of the players... and all because one ship seemed "cool" to introduce.

I like your idea about it only being unlocked during war decade, that could be one alternative. As for no aggression, that's not such a good idea because ten battleships might start attacking her, but she can't fight back without Concord retribution.

The ship is no more or less fragile than any other ship. It could be rushed by a fleet of cruisers and or battleships or find itself against another corps carrier.

Additionally, if this thing could carry fighters, what's to stop me just clustering a bunch of these round a POS or station and assigning an enormous blob of fighters to the gang doing the actual fighting?

Mini-Logistics.

So T2 Class Frigates with bonus's to remote repair range and amount. Great for Wolfpacks and Frigate-on-Frigate PVP.